Mr. Baldwin
 

Is one astute Dude!! The first part is His intelligence, the second is My addition..

What you miss is that your "world saving" batteries DON'T get built without a LOT of energy...that energy is mostly oil. You may save some oil driving the car...but you used just about all...if not all or more...oil making the car...because batteries need a lot of energy to create. Lithium is in limited supply you're NOT going to turn ALL the vehicles into electric.
The point You fail to make is what to do with a few million pounds of Toxic Waste, Spent/worthless batteries? None last forever?? A suggestion, Load them up on elons rocket ships and destroy the universe at the same time as Earth..

My replies are long enough already...I don't list EVERY negative.

You are absolutely correct...they don't last forever...they'll need recycling...which TAKES ENERGY. MORE energy than those batteries will produce.

It's called entropy...most people don't know what it is...and fail to account for it. There is NO "perpetual motion" You CAN'T get MORE energy OUT of a battery than you put in. No matter how efficient a battery is...diesel will beat it out. Pound for pound, dollar for dollar.

As the cost of oil goes up...so will the cost of manufacturing batteries. It's a zero sum reality. EREI - energy return on energy invested.

The REAL solution..the ONLY solution that works...that IS sustainable...isn't going to be popular. The planet has twice as many people as it can carry indefinitely. The current population "runs out of supplies" in the not too distant future. And medicine is trying to PROLONG lives? The POOR included? We used to have wars and disease that would cull half the worlds population here and there. And that was BEFORE oil. A planet with a billion would...even 2 billion. But NOT 9 billion +. Living to be well over 100?

It's a zero sum world out there...there's NOT enough to go around. Right now...we pump oil as fast as we can...THE REAL REASON FOR FINDING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES...they WANT us to cut back...they NEED us to cut back because the population keeps growing ...there is always more demand...and it can't be pumped out any faster. We already pumped out ALL the easy oil. NOW...we MUST pump in the arctic, out in frigid oceans, through 6 miles of water, we MUST frack the OLD wells because the other sources aren't putting out fast enough...to meet the increasing demand.

Oil is used for EVERYTHING. It's the key to modern western civilization. We've reached...peak pumping...not peak oil. The oil is there...but it's thick...like molasses...you can only get it out so fast.

Entropy is a complex concept from physical chemistry but it has nothing to do with batteries. You are using big words and you do not understand their meaning. Take a course in thermodynamics before you try to use the word entropy.

I use "big words" because they DESCRIBE what I'm talking about. I didn't think the term entropy to be that high above your edcational level.

Nol dougie...it is YOU who doesn't understand. I used entropy to TRY to explain to the ignorant rabble that it takes ENERGY to "organize" to "build" something. There's a LOT more energy going into batteries than JUST mining the f@cking lithium! There's a LOT more energy going into MAKING battering...than you'll EVER get out of them. Right now...energy is cheap...oil, gas...it's cheap. What does it cost...$3 dollars a DAY to electrify your house? Heat, air, reefer, TV, computer, lights, hot water...all for $4 a day. WHAT would it cost you if you had to do it EXCLUSIVELY with batteries? How much dougie?

Batteries ARE f@cking "physical chemistry" you stupid f@cking idiot. What...are you black? A woman using a man's name?

You DO NOT get more energy out of a battery than it took to MAKE and CHARGE the f@cking battery you retard. You think you're going to f@cking replace oil with batteries?

Thermodynamics...Newton...how quaint.

Go back to the kids table until you grow up a little more...you're not ready for the adult table and adult conversations yet dougie.

You ARE being duped.

Here ya go douchie...oops...dougie.

"entropy

The idea of entropy comes from a principle of thermodynamics dealing with energy. It usually refers to the idea that everything in the universe eventually moves from order to disorder, and entropy is the measurement of that change.

The word entropy finds its roots in the Greek entropia, which means "a turning toward" or "transformation." The word was used to describe the measurement of disorder by the German physicist Rudolph Clausius and appeared in English in 1868. A common example of entropy is that of ice melting in water. The resulting change from formed to free, from ordered to disordered increases the entropy."

Yes it takes energy to overcome entropy to make ice. As we all know the cost of that energy is very inexpensive. Would you care to explain to me why energy cost to make batteries is so much more?

You have another device which overcomes entropy in your house, it's called an air conditioner. You overcome entropy every time you turn it on. Why is the entropy in making a battery so much more?

dougie...you just don't get it...NOTHING is "free"...it ALWAYS takes more energy to make something than you'll get out of it later...always.

It took more energy (created more heat) to make and run your air conditioner than the amount of energy (heat) it removes.

Likewise...it takes MORE energy to manufacture AND charge a battery than you'll EVER get out of it.

They talk about efficiencies in batteries how efficient they are at taking the energy you input and turning it into chemical energy to be released later.

NOTHING is FREE...you NEVER end up with more than you started with when it comes to energy.

If you don't understand now...well...you may never.

According to you...you could run EVERYTHING on the batteries you are manufacturing with NO outside energy...which is false.

This is the minutiae that most people miss.

Sorry...didn't mean to curse at you...it's not your fault.

We are agreeing on something, nothing is free. I don't think you know it but you kind of stating the 1st law of thermodynamics. Let's break down you arguments and who knows maybe we can teach you some thermodynamics. Yes you can't get the energy you spent building an air conditioner out of it again. That energy is now "locked" in the unit. This is totally different from the energy you put into it to make it work. Thermodynamics says the amount of energy (electricity) and the amount of cold air produced are equal (ignoring small mechanical loss). As long as you have electricity you can run this cycle over and over again and it is no way related to the amount of energy it took to build the air conditioner, you cannot get that energy back (think of the energy lost in making the metal to build the unit). To get cold air you have to input energy, electricity from either coal or a windmill. Try looking up the first law of thermodynamics and avoid websites pushing pseudo science.

And the point I'm making is...it takes MUCH more energy to MAKE your batteries than you'll EVER get out of them. You can't just FORGET all the energy it took to build your air conditioner...AND you can't just forget ALL the energy it takes to build a battery.

The ONLY reason you CAN think this way...so nonchalantly about "energy" and "work" is that oil and gas are basically free. ONLY with oil/gas do you get back 100X the energy you put into getting and using it.

"A barrel of oil contains about six gigajoules of energy. That’s six billion joules or 1667 kilowatt-hours. No, we don’t have any idea how much that is, either, so let’s think about the equivalent. Sit a reasonably healthy male adult – let’s call him Jim – on an exercise bike wired to an efficient generator, and he can produce 100 watts for you. So after Jim has pedaled an hour he’s produced 100 watt hours of energy, or 1/10 of a kw-hour.

To produce the same energy as that in a gallon of gasoline, 33 kilowatt-hours, Jim would need to pedal 33 X 10 = 330 hours. We need to be legal, of course, so Jim only pedals 40 hours per week. Jim’s desperate, so let’s assume he agrees to take no breaks and never stops working to chat at the water cooler or to check in with his friends on Facebook. He pedals straight through for 40 hours per week. He will have pedaled enough to equal the energy in a gallon of gasoline in a little more than eight weeks. Because Jim’s desperate, he gladly works for minimum wage, so your energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline is a bargain at $6.55 X 330 = $2,194. How’s the price of gasoline lookin’?

Jim likes working for you, so let’s ask him to pedal long enough to produce the same energy as that in a barrel of oil, 1667 kw-hours. Easy to figure. 1667 divided by 1/10, or to say it another way, 1,667 X 10, or 16,667 hours of pedaling. That’s 417 weeks. Jim must love pedaling that bike, because he never takes a vacation. Jim will have pedaled enough to produce the energy in a barrel of oil in 417 divided by 52 = 8.01 years. Congress has cooperated with you during this entire adventure and kept the minimum wage stable at $6.55 per hour, so your energy equivalent from Jim will cost you only $6.55 X 16,667 = $109,169."

"If this is true, oil is essentially “free” energy at the current price. I decided to check it out, as the claim seemed a little hard to believe at first.

After some quick calculations from first principals (see below), I found that for a purely theoretical task, like heating water with a pedal powered generator, the claim is correct. It would indeed take 12 years of laboring to produce the same amount of heat energy as a single barrel of oil."

You CANNOT simply "replace" oil with ANYTHING short of a "Mr Fusion" from Back to the Future.

I’m enjoying this high school physics class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let me try again to explain entropy. You have tons of renewable energy systems in The Villages. They are called solar pool heaters. You are correct it takes oil and it takes energy to refine it, make the plastic and mold the plastic. How much does this energy cost, I don't know but since I know of no subsidies for solar pool heaters I think we can guess it's a small part of the purchase price. Purchase price will include other costs, labor, taxes, profit to name a few. They are renewable energy because they turn sun light into hot water. It would be much simpler to hook you pool up to your hot water heater and use coal derived electricity. I'm sure if you talk to your neighbors they will say the solar heater payed for itself many times over compared to an electric heater. Some day the solar heather will wear out, it will start to leak and not be fixable. You can't get the entropy back out of the system because their is no good way to turn the solar heater back into oil and unlock the energy used to make the plastic. However it is such a insignificant cost you don't care. A solar pool heater and a windmill are the same concept, turn one form of energy into another.

It's NOT a comparison...it's apples to oranges...since when did we add the sun? We are SO far from the original premise. Heating water is comparable to driving an electric car via batteries?

You said batteries can take over for oil...can replace fuel. I said they can't.

So...prove it.

Get me the TOTAL cost...in ENERGY...to build a battery...energy used charging it...and compare that to it's total energy output over it's life.

It won't be CLOSE to the amount of energy used to create it. It's energy negative...there is negative EREI (energy return for energy invested). It takes more energy to make your battery than it will ever produce. So WHY "switch"? You're going to use more energy than you gain.

A barrel of oil contains the equivalent of 8 "man years" of "energy", of "work". One man working continuously, no breaks, no days off, 24/7, for 8 years in ONE barrel of oil.

How much is in your battery? REMEMBER...EVERY CHARGE has energy costs. You say: "I can use the sun to charge the battery...it's free...solar is free".

Au contraire...you MUST factor in the ENERGY COST of your solar charger. The sun's energy is HARDLY free. Solar panels take a lot of energy to mine, refine, manufacture, the electronics need fabrication plants. Copper needs mining, can't use plastic for anything...it's made of oil.

A barrel of oil is $60...a barrel of diesel is $125. How much are your batteries?

Batteries are NOT going to REPLACE fuels.

Oh...another thing...the power grid. It can't handle adding 250 million electric cars. You DO know WHY they want us to conserve electricity? Why everything is "Energy star"? Because there's NOT ENOUGH to go around during peak demands. How do you handle road trips? Everyone can't charge at night.

Trying again. Entropy is a fundamental property of matter. What that means is it is involved in any chemical reaction. If you are making gasoline, paint, steel, plastic or batteries, entropy is involved. There are no special rules for batteries. Because entropy is involved in making steel doesn't mean your car is super expensive.

What he doesn't understand is this...

The suns power is locked up in oil. The sun and earth ALREADY DID THE WORK of putting the energy there. We just pump it out and use it...it's basically FREE energy. It's like a never ending "battery"...portable power...basically free.

Creating a battery to supply the SAME amount of energy as that barrel of oil takes a WHOLE LOT OF ENERGY because WE are putting the energy into the BATTERY. And we MUST put in MORE than we get out.

The reason I used entropy was to try to explain that once it's used it's gone...the barrel of oil OR the battery charge. Getting "another charge" of energy is as simple as pumping it out of the ground for oil...but for the battery WE must put that power back in and it is therefore LESS efficient to run vehicles on batteries than fuel.

If you want to bring in cost to my arguments google powerwall/Australia. People are putting unsubsidized solar panels with battery back up. Why Australia and not here. Cost is a relative term. Their electricity costs 21/2 times as much as ours (heavily coal dependent). These systems are not price competitive here today but will be in the future. I'm sorry it's hard to explain science in a short paragraph.

"$16,000 for a solar installation with the Tesla Powerwall"

"Our analysis of the finances of Tesla’s Powerwall battery found that the payback period for purchasing Powerwall would be 38 years with on-peak rates at $0.15 per kilowatt hour and off-peak rates at $0.06 per kilowatt hour"

You'd have to save more than $100 a month on electricity costs to pay for itself in the thirteen years it takes before you have to buy new batteries.

The sun just doesn't put out enough energy to replace oil. To SUPPLEMENT it...YES. But not replace it.

Oil ALLOWED modern western civilization. We will continue to be dependent on it until a NEW "free" energy source is developed. A "Mr Fusion".

The whole CO2 thing is a hoax. They want us to conserve energy because we're at the limits of PROVIDING it in the amounts that a developing world requires. America is being brought down so the developing countries CAN develop. China uses more energy than America.

The limits to growth are limits to available energy. Once all the fields are fracked...what do we do then?

DO we NEED to cut back on our use of oil...of course...we don't disagree there. At this rate it's NOT going to last forever.

What we MUST do...is cut the worlds population back to sustainable levels. We MUST cut it by at least half.

Let ME try again...

Oil has a positive EREI...a battery is negative. You GET MORE energy from a barrel of oil than you use to get it...a batter consumes MORE energy than it can supply.

"Energy returned on energy invested:
In physics, energy economics, and ecological energetics, energy returned on energy invested; or energy return on investment, is the ratio of the amount of usable energy delivered from a particular energy resource to the amount of exergy used to obtain that energy resource. It is a distinct measure from energy efficiency as it does not measure the primary energy inputs to the system, only usable energy.

"When the EROEI of a resource is less than or equal to one, that energy source becomes a net "energy sink", and can no longer be used as a source of energy, but depending on the system might be useful for energy storage (for example a battery)."

"To be considered viable as a prominent fuel or energy source a fuel or energy must have an EROEI ratio of at least 3:1"

"For example, given a process with an EROEI of 5, expending 1 unit of energy yields a net energy gain of 4 units. The break-even point happens with an EROEI of 1 or a net energy gain of 0."

"A 2015 review in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews assessed the energy payback time and EROI of solar photovoltaics. In this study, which uses an insolation of 1700/kWh/m²/yr and a system lifetime of 30 years, mean harmonized EROIs between 8.7 and 34.2 were found. Mean harmonized energy payback time varied from 1.0 to 4.1 years."

"In regard to fossil fuels, when oil was originally discovered, it took on average one barrel of oil to find, extract, and process about 100 barrels of oil. The ratio, for discovery of fossil fuels in the United States, has declined steadily over the last century from about 1000:1 in 1919 to only 5:1 in the 2010s"

"ESOEI (or ESOIe) is used when EROEI is below 1. "ESOIe is the ratio of electrical energy stored over the lifetime of a storage device to the amount of embodied electrical energy required to build the device."

"How deep should the probing in the supply chain of the tools being used to generate energy go? For example, if steel is being used to drill for oil or construct a nuclear power plant, should the energy input of the steel be taken into account, should the energy input into building the factory being used to construct the steel be taken into account and amortized? Should the energy input of the roads which are used to ferry the goods be taken into account? What about the energy used to cook the steelworker's breakfasts? These are complex questions evading simple answers.[37] A full accounting would require considerations of opportunity costs and comparing total energy expenditures in the presence and absence of this economic activity."

These are ALL NEGATIVE...meaning they require MORE energy than they output.

"Storage Technology ESOEI

Zinc bromide battery 9
Vanadium redox battery 10
Pumped hydroelectric storage 704
NaS battery 20
Lithium ion battery 32
Lead acid battery 5
Compressed air energy storage 792"

I didn't say tomorrow renewable would be price competitive but I did give you one country where it is price competitive. You clearly don't understand the science and I'm ok with that as long as you don't try to make scientific arguments. Gas displaced coal and wind and solar are displacing gas in certain parts of the country, all based on price. If you want cheaper electricity prices long term you should push renewables because as a new technology it will drop in price as the industry matures. If you want to give more money to the Koch brothers go for gas and oil. Those websites your reading are supported by the Koch brothers.

I understand completely...

"all based on price" but NOT EROEI.

HOW did we get BACK to this???

We were talking about BATTERIES...YOU claim that batteries are more energy efficient than fuel.

PROVE THAT CLAIM...not "in the future"...not "maybe some day".

You said batteries WILL replace fuels because they're more energy efficient. Show me.

If you can't/won't talk about batteries and their energy cost vs energy output...we have nothing else to say...you keep dragging me out onto tangents that have nothing to do with your claim.

Yes...Australia has solar and batteries out in the bush where electric hookups are prohibitive...now...WHAT does that have to do with batteries being more energy efficient than fuels in cars?

Get a handle on the ADD...and focus.

Get the EROEI for a battery and oil...compare them...oil wins...batteries...ALL batteries...lose...because they can NEVER be as efficient as oil...because they MUST BE MANUFACTURED and oil flows out of the ground.

A barrel of oil is a barrel of free energy...a battery MUST be manufactured USING energy and MUST then be FILLED with MORE energy than it will be able to deliver. Can't you see that?

They're pushing us towards alternative energy NOT because it'll EVER replace the energy of fossil fuels...but because WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF READILY PUMP-ABLE OIL. we must SAVE...hold onto...our precious oil. It's too valuable to burn up. Almost EVERYTHING is made with oil. Plastics, chemicals...

I'm done doug...if you don't see it now...you won't with me explaining it.

It's a con to steal your money...steal your labor...it's what they do. Working Americans work until May 24th to pay the government. We've given them $20 trillion so far...what have we gotten for it? America has dropped from # 1 to #25.

MOST "crises" aren't really...they're just sold as one to get the IGNORANT public behind it.

The earth IS warming...IF you believe the numbers...(ask people in ND right now if there's global warming)...but it's NOT CO2 doing it. CO2 contributes less than 1% to the greenhouse effect. That's science I DO know too.

One more...

A barrel of oil has 1667 kilowatt-hours of power
My last electric bill was 555 kilowatt-hour
My entire house can run for 3 months on the energy from ONE barrel of oil. That cost me $60.
How much would the batteries cost that could run my house 24/7 for 3 months? What would be the ENERGY cost to "charge them up"? MORE than they discharged because batteries are NOT 100% efficient.

Better?

Gas tanks and batteries both store energy. This has nothing to do with efficiency. You can drive a car 30 miles for $3 of gas. You can drive an electric car about 30 miles for $1 of electricity. This is not a comparison of efficiency just a statement of fact.

But MORE "energy" was used for those 30 miles driven by battery compared to a gallon of gas. A gas tank...$50 is a LOT cheaper than $10,000 worth of batteries.

PRICE has NOTHING to do with it...we're not talking about price...we're talking about ENERGY.

Efficiency has everything to do with it...you claimed a battery can replace fuel. It will be as/more efficient.

Tell me HOW MUCH ENERGY goes into making/charging a battery and how much energy is used to deliver a gallon of gas. For the gas...it's 1/5th...20% of the energy contained in that gallon of gas was expended refining and delivering that gallon of gas.

For a lithium battery it's MINUS 32. 32X the energy contained in the battery is used to build/charge it. And EVERY time you recharge it...you go MORE negative because NO battery is 100% efficient.

It IS all about efficiency. Until we can build a battery that recharges itself with water and air...a battery CAN'T be more efficient.

You have too many ideas which are confusing your thoughts. If you are going to buy a car and one saves you $2 for every 30 miles what you want to know is how much is that over the life of the car. For a car that lasts 150,000 miles the savings would be 150,000 divided by 30 times $2. The answer is $10,000. Efficiency of the battery has nothing to do with this calculation, the energy stored in a gallon of gas has nothing to do with this calculation. The thing you care about is what does it cost to drive to the store. If gasoline goes up to $5 a gallon your savings would be $20,000 over the life of the car and now it is price competitive. When the cost of the battery drops $10,000 EV's will be price competitive. None of this has anything to do with your pseudo science and you don't need to know science to decide which type of car is cheaper.

ANOTHER tangent...

No...YOU care what it costs in DOLLARS...I'm talking about ENERGY cost...HOW MUCH ENERGY DID IT TAKE TO MAKE THE BATTERIES...your battery car costs/requires multiples MORE in ENERGY costs (energy USED) to manufacture and keep charged.

If "gas" goes up to $5 a gallon...the dollar COST of your batteries WILL go up too, the dollar COST of charging them WILL go up too.

It IS a "zero sum" equation. As oil goes up...everything goes up with it. Because there is NOTHING that can replace oil right now.

I'm done...maybe someone else can explain it to you...have a good new year.

[QUOTE=Guest]ANOTHER tangent...

No...YOU care what it costs in DOLLARS...I'm talking about ENERGY cost...HOW MUCH ENERGY DID IT TAKE TO MAKE THE BATTERIES...your battery car costs/requires multiples MORE in ENERGY costs (energy USED) to manufacture and keep charged.

If "gas" goes up to $5 a gallon...the dollar COST of your batteries WILL go up too, the dollar COST of charging them WILL go up too.

It IS a "zero sum" equation. As oil goes up...everything goes up with it. Because there is NOTHING that can replace oil right now.

I'm not sure why you can't grasp this but I'll try again. If you buy a battery for your flashlight the cost of all of the energy to make that battery is included in the purchase price. It has to be less than the purchase price or the battery company would lose money on every battery and they soon would be out of business. Everready batteries have been around for a long time. Flashlight battery or battery for an electric car the economics are the same.
Next year I am going to buy a Chevy Bolt, an all electric car. Purchase price (without subsidies) is 38K. It will save me 10k in gasoline costs over its lifetime. If I compare it to gas cars costing 28k they come out ahead, more room and no limit on range but not by much. In today's prices the EV is almost price competitive. Why am I doing it, I want to say the the Koch brothers,Saudis, Iranians and Russians try being poor for awhile. If my economic analysis of buying an EV tomorrow is wrong please show me the error. Please don't try to baffle with scientific bull**** you don't understand.

[QUOTE=Guest]You're stuck on MONEY...money cost. Money cost has NOTHING to do with how much ENERGY it cost because right now "energy" is almost free. Transportation via fuels, electricity generation via fuels...oil and natural gas are ALMOST free energy. That is WHY your batteries are "cheap" because the energy used to make/charge them is cheap.

BUT...the point you don't get is...energy IS cheap because it's "fossil" fuels...energy sitting in the ground...waiting to be lit. It only costs $3 a gallon because speculators decided it was worth $3 a gallon...it's also $3 a gallon because there are 9 billion people ALL wanting some of it. Oil COULD be 30 cents a gallon.

But your batteries...they MUST be built...from scratch...EVERYTHING going into you battery NEEDS energy to be made. And THEN it needs MORE energy to charge...more than you'll EVER get out.

STOP thinking in terms of dollars...START thinking in terms of energy consumed and energy output.

A barrel of oil RELEASES 5X more energy than is required to "make" that barrel. A Lithium battery CONSUMES 32X MORE energy to manufacture and charge than is will release during use. The MORE times you use your battery the WORSE the costs become because each recharge uses more energy than the battery can release.

Your batteries are ONLY possible because there is almost unlimited CHEAP fossil fuels to create the energy required to create the battery.

You are talking "dollars", I'm talking about actual "energy" Oil is a better "value" in energy terms. Dollar values are arbitrary and capricious. Dollar values change...energy requirements/output are fairly fixed.

[QUOTE=Guest]Last comment. If you want to talk cost in terms of entropy, btu's and other measures of the chemistry involved my suggestion is to take two semesters of calculus, two of general chemistry and one of thermodynamics. Then we can have a scientific argument. Other that that it's like I'm trying to explain algebra to a second grader.

[QUOTE=Guest]Yea right...bring it on bad boy. You're a poseur.

"Dollar values change...energy requirements/output are fairly fixed."

You have a problem with that? You can go down to the La Brea tar pits and find the FREE energy USED to build things...like your batteries. I could heat a house for decades...I could use it for steam power...there are ALL kinds of uses for that oil...just sitting there...waiting to be scooped out.

Where's your battery?

We have to wait for the lithium to be mined and processed into metal...VERY energy costly. Then other items need to be manufactured...again ENERGY costly. It all has to be put together in a factory somewhere...more ENERGY.

My barrel of oil cost me the energy to fill a barrel...100 calories? I will get 8 man years of energy...of work...from it.

Is your battery ready yet? How much energy have you spent so far?

You WILL get 32X LESS energy OUT of a lithium battery than you put in.

BECAUSE: "energy requirements/output are fairly fixed"

ALL batteries are energy SINKS...they consume FAR more...32X more...energy than they create. That energy comes from fossil fuels.

NO "alternative energy source" is "self sufficient". Only oil is self sufficient because it's "saved sun energy". Meaning it can CREATE more energy than was used to get the outputted energy. More energy goes into a nuclear plant, a solar plant, wind farm than will EVER come out of it.

It's a scam.

Oil is 8 man years in a barrel. Solar, wind, and BATTERIES...ALL...require MUCH more energy to build than they'll ever produce. We CAN build them ONLY because we have OIL to provide the vast energy needed. It takes 32 barrels of oil to make a lithium battery that outputs the energy in ONE barrel of oil.

Take away oil and you take away modern western civilization.

[QUOTE=Guest]After all those big words can you explain to me how Costa Rico ran there grid for 300 days last year without any oil or coal? Looks like one figured out how to do it.

[QUOTE=Guest]Costa Rica isn't the f@cking United States...it's a 3rd world SMALL country with no appreciable manufacturing sitting close to the Equator.

They IMPORT just about everything...someone else used energy to create it. IF they had to manufacture everything they use...they couldn't do it. Oil isn't used much for power production...it's much too valuable...NG and coal are the biggies for electricity production.

Apples and oranges again. Let me compare electrical demand for MY house compared to the Pentagon. Let me exaggerate like you are.

SMALL scale...just about ANYTHING can work. LARGE scale...not much works.

Fossil fuels drive the world...like it or not...there is NO replacement short of a "Mr Fusion".

Are those words small enough for you?

[QUOTE=Guest]Math analysis. Next year when your paying $3 for a gallon of gas and I'm paying $1 for electricity I'm not going to care about any of the big words I used or any of the words you copied from a website sponsored by the big oil companies. I have a minor in math and and I can say with complete certainty $1 is cheaper than $3 all the fancy words be dammed.

It's obvious; trying to explain something to you is like talking to a brick wall. Don did not use big words, he used fact and logic, both of those are the idiot's enemy. You might have a minor in arithmetic, but you have no common sense. If you doubt me, go ask your wife, she knows you are "dumb".

Oh you won't be paying $1 for electricity for long, none of the boys that own and operate energy companies are going to take a cut in pay...



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=Guest]Germany gets 35% from renewables and is a a manufacturing country. They use a lot of nuclear. Should we build a nuke near The Villages.

[QUOTE=dumbete;1497990]Yes, one right next to your house so you can really enjoy it.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=Guest]OK...you just WON'T give up...and AS USUAL...you are completely wrong...

"Energy in Germany
Energy in Germany is sourced predominantly by fossil fuels, followed by nuclear power, biomass, wind, hydro and solar."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ermany.svg.png

"Germany is one of the largest consumers of energy in the world.[36]

Renewable energy is more present in the domestically produced energy, since Germany imports about two-thirds of its energy."

"Germany is the fifth-largest consumer of oil in the world. Russia, Norway, and the United Kingdom are the largest exporters of oil to Germany, in that order.[38]

Germany is the third-largest consumer of natural gas in the world,[citation needed] and imports gas from Russia via the Nord Stream; in 2016, Germany imported 49.8 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas from Gazprom.[39] A terminal in Emden opened for gas from Norway in 2016.[40] Germany imports more than half of its energy.[41]

Because of its rich coal deposits it has a long tradition of fuelling its economy with coal. It still is the fourth-largest consumer of coal in the world, even though domestic coal mining has been almost completely phased out, because German coal is a lot more expensive to mine than coal in China or Australia. Germany has the largest national market of electricity in Europe."

"The main source of electricity is coal.[5] The 2007 plan to build 26 new coal plants[6] is controversial in light of Germany's commitment to curbing emissions."

They can have "renewables" at 35% because they BUY 2/3rds of their energy from other countries.

Germany CANNOT sustain itself with regard to energy...they HAVE to buy 2/3rd of what they use.

HOW in the world can you use Germany as an example of a "successful" "renewable" energy country? They're 2/3rds short and must purchase energy from outside. It's as far fetched as comparing Costa Rica to the US.

Thank you for the correction.

You're welcome.

I usually know what I'm talking about.

Doug...it IS physics...oil is concentrated energy from the sun accumulated over hundreds of millions of years...(unless you subscribe to the abiotic oil theories)...we can just pump it out and use it...as is.

A battery must be manufactured and then it must be charged. As I said earlier...it takes 32 times more energy to MAKE a battery then you'll get out of it. It takes 32 barrels worth of energy to get out 1 barrel of energy from the battery.

You are concerned with PRICE of energy which is an artificial descriptor of "cost". Whereas I was talking about the amount of energy actually used to make the battery.

For a barrel of oil EQUIVALENT in energy...it takes 20% of that barrel to get 1 barrel of oil.

For a barrel of oil EQUIVALENT in energy...it takes 32 barrels of oil equivalent of energy...to make and charge your battery.

It takes 160X more energy to make a battery than it does to pump out a barrel of oil.

The PRICE paid in dollars has little to do with the ENERGY costs because NOW...using fossil fuels...energy is ALMOST FREE in dollars.

It's like water...it's almost free...leave your sprinklers on all night and it'll cost you less than $10.

I've got it! WATER!

Fossil fuels are like water...we pump it out of the ground and it's cheap.

Your batteries are like BOTTLING the water.

It adds an extra step. Extra hassle. It takes MORE energy.

You can't run a city ONLY on bottled water...bottled energy. A city needs open spigots.

Monetary value...the cost in dollars changes, it's variable.

The ENERGY cost of building batteries is enormous...160X the energy cost of pumping fossil fuels.

It is called physical chemistry, where physics and chemistry over lap. What type battery are you talking about. A flashlight battery runs on a one way chemical reaction. When everything reacts the battery is dead. With a rechargeable battery it is a reversible chemical reaction. I could believe it takes 32 times more energy to make it than it can store and this energy you would never get back. You won't get any energy out until you charge it and put energy into it. You get out slightly less than you put in but you can do it over and over.

"A battery must be manufactured and then it must be charged. As I said earlier...it takes 32 times more energy to MAKE a battery then you'll get out of it. It takes 32 barrels worth of energy to get out 1 barrel of energy from the battery."
Is the the rechargeable battery different. If it takes so much energy to make it why is practical?